(a) A person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle when, while operating a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug or both, he causes the death of another person as a consequence of the effect of such liquor or drug.
(b) Manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle is a class C felony and the court shall suspend the motor vehicle operator's license or nonresident operating privilege of any person found guilty under this section for one year. The court shall also order such person not to operate any motor vehicle that is not equipped with an approved ignition interlock device, as defined in section 14-227j, for a period of two years after such person's operator's license or nonresident operating privilege is restored by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles.
(P.A. 82-403, S. 1; P.A. 83-534, S. 8; P.A. 85-147, S. 1; P.A. 08-150, S. 59.)
History: P.A. 83-534 amended Subsec. (b) to require the court to suspend the motor vehicle operator's license or nonresident operating privilege of any person found guilty for one year; P.A. 85-147 deleted “while intoxicated” from the title of the offense and a provision that defined “intoxication” to include intoxication by alcohol or by drug or both, and replaced elements of offense of “when, in consequence of his intoxication while operating a motor vehicle, he causes the death of another person” with “when, while operating a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug or both, he causes the death of another person as a consequence of the effect of such liquor or drug”; P.A. 08-150 amended Subsec. (b) to require court to order a person found guilty not to operate any motor vehicle that is not equipped with an approved ignition interlock device for a period of two years after restoration of such person's operator's license or nonresident operating privilege.
See Sec. 14-111g re motor vehicle operator's retraining program.
See Sec. 14-227o re discount for ignition interlock device services.
Cited. 193 C. 632; 213 C. 74; 216 C. 699; 219 C. 752; 229 C. 228. There is no language in section to indicate expressly that legislature intended that a person convicted of second degree manslaughter with a motor vehicle could not also be convicted of first degree manslaughter. 263 C. 390.
Cited. 5 CA 378; 9 CA 686; 11 CA 122; 12 CA 129; Id., 294; 16 CA 358; 18 CA 223; 21 CA 138; 22 CA 108; 23 CA 215; Id., 720; 29 CA 825; 34 CA 557; Id., 655; 36 CA 710; 40 CA 359.
Subsec. (a):
Sec. 53a-57 not a lesser included offense. 11 CA 473. Cited. 20 CA 495. Conviction under Subsec. and for manslaughter in second degree under Sec. 53a-56(a)(1) for the death of one person does not constitute double jeopardy. 111 CA 466.
Notes of Decisions
McCoy v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 12 A.3d 948 (Conn. 2011).
· cites it 61× “Section 14-227a (g) provides that a conviction under General Statutes § 53a-56b, which defines the offense of manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle and is a class C felony, or General Statutes § 53a-60d, which defines assault in the second degree with a motor…”
State v. Kirsch, 820 A.2d 236 (Conn. 2003).
· cites it 14× “The defendant, Randy Kirsch, appeals 1 from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-55 (a) (3), 2 manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes §…”
State v. Perkins, 856 A.2d 917 (Conn. 2004).
· cites it 10× “The defendant appeals 1 from the trial court’s judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 53a-56b (a), 2 misconduct with a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes §…”
State v. Coccomo, 31 A.3d 1012 (Conn. 2011).
· cites it 14× “The defendant subsequently was charged with numerous offenses and was convicted, after a jury trial, of three counts each of manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 53a-56b (a) and misconduct with a motor vehicle in violation of…”
State v. McKenna, 525 A.2d 1374 (Conn. App. Ct. 1987).
· cites it 26× “The defendant is appealing from a judgment of conviction, after a trial to a jury, of the crime of manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle while intoxicated in violation of General Statutes § 53a-56b (a). The defendant contends that the trial court erred (1) in…”
State v. Kwaak, 572 A.2d 1015 (Conn. App. Ct. 1990).
· cites it 16× “The defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 53a-56b (a), 1 and operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicating liquor in violation…”
State v. Lonergan, 548 A.2d 718 (Conn. App. Ct. 1988).
· cites it 11× “The defendant was subsequently arrested and charged with manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle while intoxicated in violation of General Statutes § 53a-56b. 2 The defendant pleaded not guilty to both of these charges.”
State v. Sanko, 771 A.2d 149 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001).
· cites it 7× “, with the commission of two counts of manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 53a-56b, 1 2 one count of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of liquor or drugs in violation of *37 General Statutes (Rev.”
State v. Rosario, 841 A.2d 254 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004).
· cites it 8× “As a consequence of that accident, the state charged him in a three count information with evasion of responsibility in the operation of a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 14-224 (a), manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle in violation of General…”
State v. Shaw, 530 A.2d 653 (Conn. App. Ct. 1987).
· cites it 18× “The state argues that the subsequent amendment of General Statutes § 53a-56b; see footnote 1, supra; reveals the legislature’s intent that General Statutes § 53a-56b be interpreted consistently with General Statutes § 14-227a.”
State v. Ortiz, 618 A.2d 547 (Conn. App. Ct. 1993).
· cites it 13× “After considering the evidence, the jury acquitted the defendant of two counts of manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of General Statutes § 53a-56b. 3 The jury found him guilty of two counts of…”
State v. Lawson, 913 A.2d 494 (Conn. App. Ct. 2007).
· cites it 8× “The defendant, Larry Lawson, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of evasion of responsibility in the operation of a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 14-224 (a) and manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle in…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.